Property Tax Appeal Board Decision 2005-24363-R-1 Hanson

              (Continued on Next Page)
Based on the facts and exhibits presented, the Property Tax
Appeal Board hereby finds no change in the assessment of the
property as established by the Cook County Board of Review is
warranted. The correct assessed valuation of the property is:
LAND: $8,934
IMPR.: $66,578
TOTAL: $75,512
Subject only to the State multiplier as applicable.
PTAB/CKG
1 of 4
PROPERTY TAX APPEAL BOARD'S DECISION
APPELLANT: Lawrence Hanson
DOCKET NO.: 05-24363.001-R-1
PARCEL NO.: 18-08-318-023-0000
The parties of record before the Property Tax Appeal Board are
Lawrence Hanson, the appellant, by attorney Rusty A. Payton of
the Law Offices of Rusty A. Payton, P.C., Chicago, Illinois; and
the Cook County Board of Review.
The subject property consists of a 40-year old, two-story
dwelling of masonry construction containing 3,344 square feet of
living area with a full, unfinished basement, central air
conditioning, a fireplace, and a two car garage.
The appellant submitted evidence before the Property Tax Appeal
Board claiming unequal treatment in the assessment process as the
basis of the appeal. In support of the equity argument, the
appellant submitted a grid analysis detailing four suggested
comparable properties. The appellant's map indicates one
comparable is located in close proximity to the subject and three
comparables are located one mile from the subject. The
comparables are two-story frame or frame and masonry dwellings
that are 35 to 44 years old with no basements. Three comparables
have central air conditioning and one comparable has a fireplace.
Their living areas are from 3,128 to 3,693 square feet in size,
and have improvement assessments of $16.61 to $17.75 per square
foot. The subject property has an improvement assessment of
$19.91 per square foot. Based on this evidence, the appellant
requested a reduction in the subject's improvement assessment.
The board of review submitted its "Board of Review Notes on
Appeal" wherein the subject's final assessment was disclosed. In
support of the subject's assessment, the board of review offered
the property characteristic sheets and a spreadsheet detailing
three suggested comparable properties located in close proximity
to the subject. The comparable properties consist of two-story
masonry dwellings that are 33 to 46 years old with central air
conditioning and fireplaces. Two comparables have full,